Occupational closure in nursing work reconsidered: UK health care support workers and assistant practitioners: A focus group study

Michael Traynor, Nina Nissen, Carol Lincoln and Niels Buus

Social Science & Medicine, 2015, vol. 136-137, 81-88

Abstract: In healthcare, occupational groups have adopted tactics to maintain autonomy and control over their areas of work. Witz described a credentialist approach to occupational closure adopted by nursing in the United Kingdom during the 19th and early 20th centuries. However, the recent advancement of assistant, ‘non-qualified’ workers by governments and managers forms part of a reconfiguration of traditional professional work. This research used focus groups with three cohorts of healthcare support workers undertaking assistant practitioner training at a London university from 2011 to 13 (6 groups, n = 59). The aim was to examine how these workers positioned themselves as professionals and accounted for professional boundaries. A thematic analysis revealed a complex situation in which participants were divided between articulating an acceptance of a subordinate role within traditional occupational boundaries and a usurpatory stance towards these boundaries. Participants had usually been handpicked by managers and some were ambitious and confident in their abilities. Many aspired to train to be nurses claiming that they will gain recognition that they do not currently get but which they deserve. Their scope of practice is based upon their managers' or supervisors' perception of their individual aptitude rather than on a credentialist claim. They ‘usurp’ nurses claim to be the healthcare worker with privileged access to patients, saying they have taken over what nursing has considered its core work, while nurses abandon it for largely administrative roles. We conclude that the participants are the not unwilling agents of a managerially led project to reshape the workforce that cuts across existing occupational boundaries.

Keywords: UK; Focus groups; Nursing; Healthcare support workers; NHS; Profession; Credentialism (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953615003020
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:136-137:y:2015:i::p:81-88

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.05.020

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().